From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Heiko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Emilio =?ISO-8859-1?Q?L=F3pez?= , mturquette@baylibre.com, sboyd@codeaurora.org, wens@csie.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: sunxi: delay protected clocks until arch initcall Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:14:17 +0100 Message-ID: <7334994.mKnQpNNMP2@diego> In-Reply-To: <20160127153722.GC4317@lukather> References: <1453385439-10154-1-git-send-email-emilio.lopez@collabora.co.uk> <1453385439-10154-2-git-send-email-emilio.lopez@collabora.co.uk> <20160127153722.GC4317@lukather> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-ID: Hi, Am Mittwoch, 27. Januar 2016, 16:37:22 schrieb Maxime Ripard: > I thought the patches were simply dropped and the > rockchip people just took another approach. nope still on track ... especially as it was Stephen's believe that orphans shouldn't even be usable to general clock users :-). I just remember that the proposed general solution was based on Mike's upcoming generic critical clock handling (the handoff thingy), which would move critical clock handling out of architecture-specific code, so I've been prodding Mike mainly. Another option might be to allow clock-controllers to handle orphans and only deny orphan usage to outside clock users, maybe expanding on what I did with the clock-conf part in patch2. Heiko